Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma: The Great Pretender and the Great Dilemma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) may present with a wide range of clinical pictures. Reportedly, paraneoplastic syndromes are the first sign in 20% of cases and only 15% of cases show the classic triad (flank pain, gross hematuria, and palpable abdominal mass) at presentation. The remaining cases present with signs and symptoms related to the site of distant metastases. These data may explain the reason why about 20-30% of patients are metastatic at presentation. We report the case of a 63-year-old woman who came to our attention for lower back pain. After imaging studies, we detected a left kidney mass of 86 × 61 × 79 mm, multiple right pulmonary nodules and six bone lesions. She underwent left radical nephrectomy. After 1 month, she developed signs of spinal cord compression with neurological deficits and she underwent emergency spinal decompression. In order to allow complete motor recovery, the subsequent stereotactic body radiation therapy was not performed, and she is currently taking combination immunotherapy regimens. Management of mRCC is in a continuous evolution due to availability of new target therapies and the possibility of a multimodal approach with surgical, focal and radiotherapy treatments. However, the ideal treatment algorithm is yet to come. This is why mRCC diagnosis and management are still challenging for the clinicians.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".